Difference Between handheld tiems and FAT times ?

[States]

What reeally is the difference .. If someone runs a 11.02 handheld in the 100m race .. whats their FAT time ?

[Richie]

There is no way of knowing what the FAT time would be, without measuring it with FAT devices. You see, FAT isn't simply a rendering of a handheld time. FAT means Fully Automatic Time-the timer is started by the device that starts the race, and and is stopped by for instance the athlete passing an optical device that registers the end of the race.

Anything that involves people stopping or starting a timing device is not FAT. That means that there is the possibility of human error creeping in, or the possiblity of a delay in the start or stop since human reactions are not instant. The Olympics uses all FAT timing, but it's unlikely many schools would have it.

So there is no way of converting non FAT to FAT times since they are fundamentally different things. Like the difference between analogue and digital TV, or watches.

[States]

true.. ive been running some 11.02 handhelds then some 11.33 fat and idk why

[mudskipper]

You are faster on the handheld as the person timing you is either anticipating the gun or you crossing the finish. FAT times are not arguable as if they err, they always er the same amount because the machine cannot randomly change how it judges start/finish like a person would.

[Richie]

Errors COULD potentially arise with FAT, but only if for instance the sensor were misplaced at the finish line. If it were, for instance not exactly perpendicular with the finish line you would experience the most slight addition to your time.

Handheld times are often faster because when the person hears the starting gun, there is then a delay while that registers with their brain, and another delay while the brain sends the signal to their hand to press the stop watch. It can never be as spot on as an automated system.

[purple]

I've never been to a meet with a FAT that wasn't set up properly. Since these things are normally very specific in the rules its usually taken seriously as it not only effects standings but possible record being set.

[George]

Yeah I completely agree-errors are theoretical only. I can see something really extreme causing problems-I don't know maybe an earthquake shakes things loose! Otherwise, it's about as accurate as it is possible to be.

[King]

I saw somewhere that officially difference between times is 0.24 seconds (so called conversion factor)

For example, if you run 10.8 sec according hanheld time, it equals to 11.04 according FAT

[States]

thanks but where did u see that at .. cuz my coach told me that to

[King]

Don't remember exactly, but other sprinters I know says the same. May be it's official standart or something like that.

[George]

I honestly don't see how there could be a conversion from one to the other because one cannot be sure that every person has the exact same delays that they experience. Some people might-it might even be that the average of the delay factor is 0.24, but people vary so you could never be sure.

[rpflash100]

IHSA, Ilinois High Schoool Association uses it also.

http://www.ihsa.org/activity/trb/2007-08/2qstand.htm